Mandatory Detention Synopsis

2 Pages 617 Words

Should Australia’s policy of indefinite mandatory detention be extended to children?


The expeditious spread of capitalism, together with globalisation has led to an increase in migration and flight around the world (Briskman and Cemelyn 2003). In addition, poverty, instability and war have led to millions of people being forcibly displaced from their countries of origin, these individuals being termed asylum seekers.
In Australia, asylum seekers who arrive unlawfully are mandatorily placed in detention for an indefinite period of time until an administrative assessment is made on whether a refugee visa should be granted in accordance with Article 1A of the Refugees Convention as amended by the Refugees Protocol. While there may or not be sociological reasons why indefinite mandatory detention is a suitable policy for adults, the question that will be addressed in discussion is whether there are sociological reasons why this policy should not be extended to children.
According to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), children are a group of persons who require special protection, and whose “best interests… shall be a primary consideration” at all times (Art 3:1). In addition, the Convention affirms that children require an environment of “happiness, love and understanding,” (UNCRC Preamble) and have a right to “rest, leisure, to engage in play and in recreational activities” (UNCRC Art 31) However, the prison like environment of a detention centre does not provide children with any of these legal requirements (Briskman and Cemlyn 2003).
Additionally, research on brain development has highlighted that a stress-free and positive environment in early childhood is essential for future mental and psychological stability of the child (Australian Association for Infant Mental Health 2003). However, according to the Briskman and Cemlym (2003), detention centres do not provide such an e...